4 ms·

It's all PR. The CEO statement, their businesses plan so far, etc. It's all PR until they IPO and stop subsidizing rides. Then, we'll see if they'll really su

It's all PR. The CEO statement, their businesses plan so far, etc. It's all PR until they IPO and stop subsidizing rides. Then, we'll see if they'll really survive as a taxi company.

vinceguidry 10y ago
You're not saying much. Half of running a company is PR.
criddell 10y ago
I don't understand why they cut prices. I've never used Uber because it's cheaper, I use it because it's better. If the drivers are able to make decent money, I feel even better about using it. Ideally, I wish the price was high enough that drivers didn't ask for tips. However, if tipping becomes the norm, Uber should remove the friction of tipping by adding it into the app.
- Cyph0n 10y ago
  I definitely wouldn't use it if it was more expensive. Heck, I'd probably become more motivated to save up and buy a car if Uber wasn't so affordable and accessible.
- AlexandrB 10y ago
  Part of the reason it is better is that the rides are subsidized which pays drivers more than otherwise and attracts more drivers (availability) while making driving a newer car possible (quality). For it to remain "better" prices would have to rise significantly which wouldn't work outside of a niche market. Worse still - if Uber loses riders and starts serving a niche again, availability will get worse as there will not be enough demand to keep that many drivers on the road. Take a look at airlines for what a race to the bottom in transportation looks like. People in aggregate are often unwilling to pay a premium for better service and will choose cheaper tickets over amenities like in-flight meals or "free" checked luggage.
lukasm 10y ago
Uber is not a taxi company. They do not compete with Taxis, but with car ownership. EDIT: I knew if I won't make my point explicit it will be misread. I was referring to: > Then, we'll see if they'll really survive as a taxi company. They are building self-driving cars to create a logistic company. They have a limited interest in being a taxi company(in a classical sense), therefore they don't care much.
- snarf21 10y ago
  Don't taxis as a business compete with car ownership?
  - aianus 10y ago
    No, they're too expensive. UberX is cheap enough to compete with car ownership.
- Tloewald 10y ago
  By that token, taxi companies aren't taxi companies. Uber is a taxi company. Actually it's a taxi middleman because it doesn't want to treat drivers as employees.
- jon-wood 10y ago
  Yes they are. They're a company which provides a car and driver to get from point A to point B on demand. That's a taxi company. If you want someone competing with car ownership look at companies like Zipcar.
- tessierashpool 10y ago
  right, because nobody on here has read Zero To One, so nobody will recognize that "define yourself as a new category if your real category is highly regulated" game. and because taxi companies don't already compete with car ownership. sure.
matt4077 10y ago
The cynic in me believes there will never be an IPO. They've started to hide their balance sheets, even from large investors. Their valuation is already sky-high, and it's basically impossible for them to realistically return 10x for new investors, but the risks are higher than they were two or three years ago. They're a time bomb financially, a mine field politically, and a toxic swamp morally. The Uber->Under transition is just a matter of months.
- wpietri 10y ago
  Yup. I think he would have been smarter to do a Groupon-style IPO, where he wraps it in Christmas paper, gets everybody hyped up, and quickly sells off his personal shares before everybody that they've bought a box full of dog turds and the share price falls by 80-90%. I'm of course happy he didn't, as he deserves to go down in flames. If we're especially lucky, he and Shkreli will end up sharing a cell. But we're probably not that lucky.
  - dowjones 10y ago
    You think Travis Kalanick should go to jail? Really? For what?

It's all PR. The CEO statement, their businesses plan so far, etc. It's all PR until they IPO and stop subsidizing rides. Then, we'll see if they'll really survive as a taxi company.

vinceguidry 10y ago

You're not saying much. Half of running a company is PR.

criddell 10y ago

I don't understand why they cut prices. I've never used Uber because it's cheaper, I use it because it's better. If the drivers are able to make decent money, I feel even better about using it. Ideally, I wish the price was high enough that drivers didn't ask for tips. However, if tipping becomes the norm, Uber should remove the friction of tipping by adding it into the app.

Cyph0n 10y ago
I definitely wouldn't use it if it was more expensive. Heck, I'd probably become more motivated to save up and buy a car if Uber wasn't so affordable and accessible.
AlexandrB 10y ago
Part of the reason it is better is that the rides are subsidized which pays drivers more than otherwise and attracts more drivers (availability) while making driving a newer car possible (quality). For it to remain "better" prices would have to rise significantly which wouldn't work outside of a niche market. Worse still - if Uber loses riders and starts serving a niche again, availability will get worse as there will not be enough demand to keep that many drivers on the road. Take a look at airlines for what a race to the bottom in transportation looks like. People in aggregate are often unwilling to pay a premium for better service and will choose cheaper tickets over amenities like in-flight meals or "free" checked luggage.

lukasm 10y ago

Uber is not a taxi company. They do not compete with Taxis, but with car ownership. EDIT: I knew if I won't make my point explicit it will be misread. I was referring to: > Then, we'll see if they'll really survive as a taxi company. They are building self-driving cars to create a logistic company. They have a limited interest in being a taxi company(in a classical sense), therefore they don't care much.

snarf21 10y ago
Don't taxis as a business compete with car ownership?
- aianus 10y ago
  No, they're too expensive. UberX is cheap enough to compete with car ownership.
Tloewald 10y ago
By that token, taxi companies aren't taxi companies. Uber is a taxi company. Actually it's a taxi middleman because it doesn't want to treat drivers as employees.
jon-wood 10y ago
Yes they are. They're a company which provides a car and driver to get from point A to point B on demand. That's a taxi company. If you want someone competing with car ownership look at companies like Zipcar.
tessierashpool 10y ago
right, because nobody on here has read Zero To One, so nobody will recognize that "define yourself as a new category if your real category is highly regulated" game. and because taxi companies don't already compete with car ownership. sure.

matt4077 10y ago

The cynic in me believes there will never be an IPO. They've started to hide their balance sheets, even from large investors. Their valuation is already sky-high, and it's basically impossible for them to realistically return 10x for new investors, but the risks are higher than they were two or three years ago. They're a time bomb financially, a mine field politically, and a toxic swamp morally. The Uber->Under transition is just a matter of months.

wpietri 10y ago
Yup. I think he would have been smarter to do a Groupon-style IPO, where he wraps it in Christmas paper, gets everybody hyped up, and quickly sells off his personal shares before everybody that they've bought a box full of dog turds and the share price falls by 80-90%. I'm of course happy he didn't, as he deserves to go down in flames. If we're especially lucky, he and Shkreli will end up sharing a cell. But we're probably not that lucky.
- dowjones 10y ago
  You think Travis Kalanick should go to jail? Really? For what?